Tales and Novels Volume I Part 13

_Answer_.--"I did not see the vase immediately upon its being taken out of the furnace; but I saw it about an hour afterward. At that time I read the inscription: the word 'tyrant' was not then visible on the vase; the place where it now appears was blue. I carried it myself, along with some others, to the king's palace at Sans Souci. The night of the first day of this month his majesty sent for me, and showed me the word _tyrant_ on the vase: I had never seen it there till then. It could not have been written after the china was baked: it must have been written whilst the biscuit was soft; and it must have been covered over with the blue paint after the vase was taken out of the furnace. I believe the word was written by Count Laniska, because I saw n.o.body else write upon the vase hut him; because the word exactly resembles the handwriting of the rest of the inscription; and because I, upon a former occasion, heard the count make use of that very word in speaking of Frederick the Great."

Here the master of the porcelain manufactory finished speaking, and was going, with Mr. Warendorff's permission, to retire; but Albert signified his intention to cross-examine him also, and the judge commanded that he should remain in court. The two next witnesses who were produced and examined were the workman who carried the vase to the furnace, and the man whose business it was to put the biscuit into the furnace. Neither of these witnesses could write or read. The workman deposed, that he carried the Prussian Vase, as he was desired, to the furnace; that no one touched it on the way thither. The man whose business it was to put the biscuit into the furnace swore that he put it along with several other vases into the furnace; that he attended the fire, and that no one touched any of them till they were baked and taken out by him. Here the evidence for the prosecution closed. Mr. Warendorff observed, that he should forbear to expatiate further upon the conduct of the prisoner; that he had been ordered by his sovereign to speak of him with all possible moderation; that he earnestly hoped the defence that should be made for Count Laniska might be satisfactory; and that the mode of trial which had been granted to him by the king was a sufficient proof of the clemency of his majesty, and of his earnest desire to allow the prisoner every possible means of re-establis.h.i.+ng his character in the eyes of the public. Albert now rose. The Count Laniska, who had appeared unmoved during Mr. Warendorff's oration, changed countenance the moment Albert rose in his defence; the Countess Laniska leaned forward over the rails of the gallery in breathless anxiety: there was no sound heard in the whole gallery, except the jingling of the chain of the king's sword, with which he was playing.

"I shall not attempt, gentlemen," said Albert, "to move your sympathy by a pathetic description of my own feelings _as a man, and as an advocate_. Whatever mine may be, it is my wish and my duty to repress them. I have need of that calm possession of my understanding, which will be necessary to convince yours of the innocence of my friend.

To convince is my object. If it were in my power, I should, upon the present occasion, disdain to persuade. I should think it equally incompatible with my own honour and that of the Count Laniska. With these sentiments, I refrain, Prussians, from all eulogium upon the magnanimity of your king. Praises from a traitor, or from the advocate of a traitor, must be unworthy of a great monarch, or of a generous people. If the prisoner before you shall be proved to be no traitor, he will doubtless have opportunities of expressing by actions, better than I can by words, his grat.i.tude to his sovereign, for having allowed him this public trial by his equals--men who are able to discern and to a.s.sert the truth. It cannot have escaped their observation, that no positive evidence whatever has yet been produced against the prisoner.

No one has yet been heard to swear that he _saw_ Count Laniska write the word _tyrant_ upon this vase. The first witness, Solomon the Jew, has informed us of what our senses could not leave us room to doubt, that the word is actually engraved upon the porcelain: further, he has told us that it was covered over with blue paint, which he rubbed off with his handkerchief. All this may be true; but the wisdom of Solomon, united to that of Baron Warendorff, has failed to point out to us any certain connexion between this blue paint, this handkerchief, and the supposed guilt of the Count Laniska. The master of the porcelain manufactory came next, and I apprehended that, as being a more respectable witness than the Jew, it was reserved for him to supply this link in the chain of evidence. But this respectable witness simply swore, that he heard a woman say she could not write or read; that she asked Count Laniska to write an inscription upon a vase for her; that, in consequence of this request, the count wrote something upon the vase, he does not pretend to know what; but he believes that the word _tyrant_ must have been one of the words then written by the count, because he saw no one else write on the vase; because the hand-writing of that word resembles the rest of the inscription; and because the count, in his hearing, had, upon a former occasion, made use of the same expression in speaking of the king. I recapitulate this evidence, to show that it is in no part _positive_: that it all rests upon circ.u.mstances. In order to demonstrate to you that the word in question could not have been written by any person but Laniska, two witnesses are produced--the workman who carried the vase to the furnace, and he who put it into the fire. The one has positively sworn that no person touched the vase on the way to the furnace. The other as positively swears that no one meddled with the vase after it was put into the furnace.

"It is granted that the word could not have been engraved after the biscuit was baked. The witness, however, has not sworn, or a.s.serted, that there was no interval of time between his receiving the vase and his putting it into the fire. What became of it during this interval?

How long did it last? Will the witness swear that no one touched it during this interval?

"These are questions which I shall put to him presently. I hope I have established my first a.s.sertion, that you have no _positive_ evidence of the prisoner's guilt.

"You well know, gentlemen, that where positive evidence of any supposed fact cannot be produced, our judgments must be decided by the balance of _probabilities_; and it is for this reason that the study of probabilities, and the power of comparing them, has, in a late celebrated essay, been called _the Science of Judges_.[5] To you, judges of my friend, all the probabilities of his supposed guilt have been stated. Weigh and compare them with those which I shall produce in favour of his innocence. His education, his character, his understanding, are all in his favour. The Count Laniska must be much below the common standard of human virtue and capacity, if, without any a.s.signable motive, he could have committed an action at once so base and so absurd as this of which he is accused. His temper is naturally or habitually open and impetuous, even to extreme imprudence. An instance of this imprudence, and of the manner in which it was pardoned by the king, has been stated to you. Is it probable that the same man should be both ingenuous and mean? Is it probable that the generosity with which he was treated made no impression upon his heart? His heart must, upon this supposition, be selfish and unfeeling. Look up, gentlemen, towards that gallery--look at that anxious mother! those eager friends! Could Laniska's fate excite such anxiety, if he were selfish and unfeeling?

Impossible! But, suppose him dest.i.tute of every generous sentiment, you cannot imagine Count Laniska to be a fool. You have been lately reminded that he was early distinguished for his abilities by a monarch, whose penetration we cannot doubt. He was high in the favour of his sovereign: just entering upon life--a military life; his hopes of distinction resting entirely upon the good opinion of his general and his king: all these fair expectations he sacrifices--for what? for the pleasure--but it could be no pleasure--for the folly of writing a single word. Unless the Count Laniska be supposed to have been possessed with an insane desire of writing the word _tyrant_, how can we account for his writing it upon this vase? Did he wish to convey to France the idea, that Frederick the Great is a tyrant? A man of common sense could surely have found, at least, safer methods of doing so than by engraving it as his opinion upon a vase which he knew was to pa.s.s through the hands of the sovereign whom he purposed thus treacherously to insult. The extreme improbability that any man in the situation, with the character, habits, and capacity of Count Laniska, should have acted in this manner amounts, in my judgment, almost to a _moral impossibility_. I knew nothing more, gentlemen, of this cause, when I first offered to defend Laniska at the hazard of my liberty: it was not merely from the enthusiasm of friends.h.i.+p that I made this offer; it was from the sober conviction of my understanding, founded upon the accurate calculation of moral probabilities.

[Footnote 5: Voltaire--Essai sur les Probabilites en fait de Justice.]

"It has been my good fortune, gentlemen, in the course of the inquiries which I have since made, to obtain further confirmation of my opinion.

Without attempting any of that species of oratory which may be necessary to cover falsehood, but which would enc.u.mber instead of adorning truth, I shall now, in the simplest manner in my power, lay the evidence before the court."

The first witness Albert called was the workman who carried the vase to the man at the furnace. Upon his cross-examination, he said that he did not deliver the vase into the hands of the man at the furnace, but that he put it, along with several other pieces, upon a tray, on a table, which stood near the furnace.

_Albert_.--"You are certain that you put it upon a tray?"

_Witness_.--"Quite certain."

_Albert_.--"What reason have you for remembering that circ.u.mstance particularly?"

_Witness_.--"I remember it, because I at first set this vase upon the ledge of the tray, and it was nearly falling. I was frightened at that accident, which makes me particularly remember the thing. I made room upon the tray for the vase, and left it quite safe upon the tray: I am positive of it."

_Albert_.--"That is all I want with you, my good friend."

The next witness called was the man whose business it was to put the vases into the furnace.

_Albert_.--"Did you see the witness who was last examined put this vase upon a tray when he left it under your care?"

_Witness_.--"I did."

_Albert_.--"You are certain that he put it _upon the tray?_ What reason have you to remember that circ.u.mstance particularly?"

_Witness_.--"I remember it, because I heard the witness cry out, 'There, William, I had like to have thrown down this cursed vase; but, look you here, I've left it quite safe upon the tray.' Upon this, I turned and looked, and saw that vase standing upon the tray, safe, with some others."

_Albert_.--"Do you recollect any thing else that pa.s.sed?"

_Witness_.--"Only that the witness told me I must put it--the vase, I mean--into the furnace directly; and I answered to that, 'All in good time; the furnace is not ready yet; it will go in along with the rest.'"

_Albert_.--"Then you did not put it into the furnace immediately after it was left with you?"

_Witness_.--"No, I did not--but that was not my fault--I could not; the furnace was not hot enough."

_Albert_.--"How long do you think it was, from the time it was left upon the tray, till you put it into the furnace?"

_Witness_.--"I don't know--I can't be positive: it might be a quarter of an hour, or twenty minutes; or it might be half an hour. I cannot be positive, sir; I cannot be positive."

_Albert_.--"You need not be positive. n.o.body wants you to be positive.

n.o.body wants to entrap you, my good friend. During this quarter of an hour, or twenty minutes, or half an hour, that you speak of, did you ever lose sight of this vase?"

_Witness_.--"To be sure I did. I did not stand watching it all the while. Why should I? It was safe enough."

_Albert_.--"Do you recollect where you found the vase when you took it to put it into the furnace?"

_Witness_.--"Yes: it was standing as it might be here, in the middle of the table."

_Albert_.--"Do you recollect whether it was standing _upon_ the tray or not?"

_Witness_.--"It was not _upon_ the tray, as I recollect: no, I'm sure it was not, for I carried to the furnace first the tray and all that was on it, and then I remember, I came back for this, which was standing, as I said before, as it might be here, in the middle of the table."

_Albert_.--"Was any body, except yourself, at the furnace, or in the room, from the time that this vase was brought to you, till you put it into the furnace?"

_Witness_.--"Not as I remember. It was our dinner-time. All the men, except myself, were gone to dinner: I stayed to mind the furnace."

_Albert_.--"It was you, then, that took this vase off the tray, was it?"

_Witness_.--"No, it was not. I never took it off the tray. I told you it was not upon the tray with the others; I told you it was upon the table, as it might be here."

_Albert_.--"Yes, when you were going to put it into the furnace, you said that you saw it standing in the middle of the table; but you recollect that you saw the workman who brought it put it upon the tray.

You told us you remembered that circ.u.mstance perfectly."

_Witness_.--"Yes, so I do."

_Albert_.--"The vase could not have got off the tray of itself. You did not take it off. How came it off, do you think?"

_Witness_.--"I don't know. I can't tell. Somebody, to be sure, must have taken it off. I was minding the furnace. My back was to the door. I don't recollect seeing any body come in; but many might have come in and out, without my heeding them."

_Albert_.--"Take your own time, my good friend. Recollect yourself; perhaps you may remember."

_Witness_.--"Oh, yes, now you put me upon recollecting, I do remember that Solomon the Jew came in, and asked me where Sophia Mansfeld was; and it certainly must have been he who took the vase off the tray; for now I recollect, as I looked round once from the furnace, I saw him with it in his hand; he was looking at the bottom of it, as I remember: he said, here are some fine verses, or some such thing; but I was minding the furnace. That's all I know about the matter."

_Albert_.--"That is enough."

The next witness who came forward was the husband of Sophia Mansfeld.--He deposed, that on the 29th of April, the day on which the Prussian Vase was finished, as stated by the former evidence, and sent to be put into the furnace, he met Sophia Mansfeld in the street: she was going home to dinner. He asked to see the vase: she said that it was, she believed, put into the furnace, and that he could not then see it; that she was sorry he had not come sooner, for that he could have written the inscription on it for her, and that would have spared her the shame of telling Count Laniska that she could not read or write.

She added, that the count had written all that was wanting for her. The witness, being impatient to see the vase, went as fast as he could to the manufactory, in hopes of getting a sight of it before it was put into the furnace. He met Solomon the Jew at the door of the manufactory, who told him that he was too late, that all the vases were in the furnace; he had just seen them put in. The Jew, as the witness now recollects, though it did not strike him at the time, was eager to prevent him from going into the furnace-room. Solomon took him by the arm, and walked with him up the street, talking to him of some money which he was to remit to Meissen, to Sophia Mansfeld's father and mother.

_Albert_ asked the witness on whose account this money was to be remitted by the Jew to Meissen.

_Witness_.--"The money was to be remitted on Sophia Mansfeld's account."

_Albert_.--"Did she borrow it from the Jew?"